Combined effects of goserelin and tamoxifen on estradiol level, breast density, and endometrial thickness in premenopausal and perimenopausal women with early-stage hormone receptor-positive breast cancer: a randomised controlled clinical trial

Breast density reduction as a predictor for prognosis in premenopausal women with estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer: an exploratory analysis of the updated ASTRRA study

BACKGROUND

While the relationship between mammographic breast density reduction (MDR) and endocrine therapy efficacy has been reported in estrogen receptor (ER)-positive breast cancer, it is still unclear in premenopausal women, especially in the case of adding ovarian function suppression (OFS) to antihormone therapy. The authors investigated the impact of MDR on prognosis stratified by treatment based on the updated results of the ASTRRA trial.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The ASTRRA trial, a randomized phase III study, showed that adding OFS to tamoxifen (TAM) improved survival in premenopausal women with estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer after chemotherapy. The authors updated survival outcomes and assessed mammography before treatment and the annual follow-up mammography for up to 5 years after treatment initiation. Mammographic density (MD) was classified into four categories based on the Breast Imaging-Reporting and Data System. MDR-positivity was defined as a downgrade in MD grade on follow-up mammography up to 2 years after randomization, with pretreatment MD grade as a reference.

RESULTS

The authors evaluated MDR in 944 of the 1282 patients from the trial, and 813 (86.2%) had grade III or IV MD. There was no difference in the MDR-positivity rate between the two treatment groups [TAM-only group (106/476 (22.3%)) vs. TAM+OFS group (89/468 (19.0%)); P =0.217). MDR-positivity was significantly associated with better disease-free survival (DFS) in the TAM+OFS group (estimated 8-year DFS: 93.1% in MDR-positive vs. 82.0% in MDR-negative patients; HR: 0.37; 95% CI: 0.16-0.85; P =0.019), but not in the TAM-only group ( Pinteraction =0.039). MDR-positive patients who received TAM+OFS had a favorable DFS compared to MDR-negative patients who received only TAM (HR: 0.30; 95% CI: 0.13-0.70; P =0.005).

CONCLUSION

Although the proportion of MDR-positive patients was comparable between both treatment groups, MDR-positivity was independently associated with favorable outcomes only in the TAM+OFS group.

The roles of anti-Müllerian hormone in breast cancer

Anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) is produced and secreted by granulosa cells of growing follicles, and its main role is to inhibit the recruitment of primordial follicles, reduce the sensitivity of follicles to follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH), and regulate FSH-dependent preantral follicle growth. It has become an effective indicator of ovarian reserve in clinical practice. Research on AMH and its receptors in recent years has led to a better understanding of its role in breast cancer. AMH specifically binds to anti-Müllerian hormone receptor II (AMHRII) to activate downstream pathways and regulate gene transcription. Since AMHRII is expressed in breast cancer cells and triggers apoptosis, AMH/AMHRII may play an important role in the occurrence, treatment, and prognosis of breast cancer, which needs further research. The AMH level is a potent predictor of ovarian function after chemotherapy in premenopausal breast cancer patients older than 35 years, either for ovarian function injury or ovarian function recovery. Moreover, AMHRII has the potential to be a new marker for the molecular typing of breast cancer and a new target for breast cancer treatment, which may be a link in the downstream pathway after TP53 mutation.

Comparison of changes in lipid profiles of premenopausal women with early-stage breast cancer treated with different endocrine therapies

Adjuvant endocrine therapy improves the prognosis of early breast cancer with hormone receptor positivity. However, there is no systematic report on the effect of endocrine therapy (particularly ovarian function suppression, OFS) on serum lipids in premenopausal women. This retrospective cohort study aimed to determine whether various endocrine treatments had different effects on blood lipids. This study enrolled 160 premenopausal patients with stage I-III breast cancer in eastern China. The initial diagnostic information was retrieved from patient's medical records, including age at the time of diagnosis, tumor characteristics, anticancer treatment and past medical history. The changes in blood lipids in patients receiving different types of endocrine therapy were compared at the 3rd, 6th, 12th, and 24th months after initiating endocrine therapy. Generalized linear mixed model was used in our analyses. Our data revealed that low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels in patients with tamoxifen (TAM) were significantly lower in the 6th, 12th, and 24th months than that in the 3rd month, while high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) levels in the 6th, 12th, and 24th months were significantly higher than that in the 3rd month, indicating that blood lipid levels generally improved with time. While in TAM plus OFS group, HDL-C levels were significantly higher in the 24th month than in the 3rd month, total cholesterol (TC) levels were significantly higher in the 24th month than in the 6th month. The lipid profiles of OFS plus aromatase inhibitor (AI) group did not show significant differences at any time point but were significantly higher than those of the other two groups especially in LDL and TC. TAM group tended to have lower serum lipid levels. With longer follow-up, no statistically significant difference in values was observed between TAM and TAM plus OFS groups at various time points. Compared with the other two groups, OFS plus AI group presented an increasing trend toward LDL-C and TC. The risk of dyslipidemia requires further investigation using a large sample size.

Impact of systemic adjuvant therapy and CYP2D6 activity on mammographic density in a cohort of tamoxifen-treated breast cancer patients

PURPOSE

Change in mammographic density has been suggested to be a proxy of tamoxifen response. We investigated the effect of additional adjuvant systemic therapy and CYP2D6 activity on MD change in a cohort of tamoxifen-treated pre- and postmenopausal breast cancer patients.

METHODS

Swedish breast cancer patients (n = 699)  operated 2006-2014, genotyped for CYP2D6, having at least three months postoperative tamoxifen treatment, a baseline, and at least one follow-up digital mammogram were included in the study. Other systemic adjuvant treatment included chemotherapy, goserelin, and aromatase inhibitors. Change in MD, dense area, was assessed using the automated STRATUS method. Patients were stratified on baseline characteristics, treatments, and CYP2D6 activity (poor, intermediate, extensive, and ultrarapid). Relative density change was calculated at year 1, 2, and 5 during follow-up in relation to treatments and CYP2D6 activity.

RESULTS

Mean relative DA decreased under the follow-up period, with a more pronounced MD reduction in premenopausal patients. No significant effect of chemotherapy, aromatase inhibitors, goserelin, or CYP2D6 activity on DA change was found. DA did not revert to baseline levels after tamoxifen discontinuation.

CONCLUSION

Our results indicate that other systemic adjuvant therapy does not further reduce MD in tamoxifen-treated breast cancer patients. We could not confirm the previously suggested association between CYP2D6 activity and MD reduction in a clinical setting with multimodality adjuvant treatment. No rebound effect on MD decline after tamoxifen discontinuation was evident.

Correlation between bone mineral density and endometrial thickness over time in women with breast cancer history

As the efficacy of chemotherapy and adjuvant endocrine therapy for breast cancer increase, the quality-of-life to cancer survivors could be more important issue in strategies of breast cancer treatment. Bone health has become more compelling in care of breast cancer survivor than ever before. This retrospective study was aimed to evaluate factors relating to the change in BMD and to ascertain the correlation between changes in BMD and EMT of women with breast cancer in follow-up. Records of 164 women who underwent surgery for breast cancer were reviewed in this study. The basal characteristics included parity, menopausal state, medication with vitamin D, bisphosphonate, selective estrogen modulator (SERM), aromatase inhibitor (AI), gonadotrophin releasing hormone agonist (GnRHa), chemotherapy, radiotherapy, cancer type including positivity of estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor and HER2, combined the other gynecologic disease or the other origin cancer. At initial and follow-up visit, all subjective were checked with BMD, endometrial thickness (EMT). The mean age was 52.1 ± 8.5 years old and overall interval between initial and follow-up visits were 17.6 ± 7.5 month in this study. The BMDs of L1-4 (1.040 ± 0.166 g/cm2 vs 1.070 ± 0.181 g/cm2, p < 0.001), femur neck (0.850 ± 0.121 g/cm2 vs 0.870 ± 0.136 g/cm2, p < 0.001), and femur total (0.902 ± 0.132 g/cm2 vs 0.915 ± 0.138 g/cm2, p < 0.001) at follow-up visit were significantly lower than those at initial visit. The change in BMDs of L1-4 (ΔBMDL1-4, r = 0.353, p < 0.001, and r = 0.228, p = 0.003), femur neck (ΔBMDNeck, r = 0.198, p = 0.011, and r = 0.282, p < 0.001), femur total (ΔBMDTotal, r = 0.294, p < 0.001, and r = 0.327, p < 0.001) had positive correlation with age and the change in EMT (ΔEMT). After age correction, ΔEMT had positive correlation with ΔBMDNeck (r = 0.245, p = 0.002) and ΔBMDTotal (r = 0.273, p < 0.001). ΔBMDL1-4 and ΔBMDNeck differed according to menopausal state (p < 0.001 and p = 0.035), bisphosphonate (p < 0.001 and p < 0.001), and GnRHa (p < 0.001 and p < 0.001). In follow-up of women with history of breast cancer, ΔEMT could be an alternative screening marker for BMD decrease.

Breast Cancer Population Attributable Risk Proportions Associated with Body Mass Index and Breast Density by Race/Ethnicity and Menopausal Status

BACKGROUND

Overweight/obesity and dense breasts are strong breast cancer risk factors whose prevalences vary by race/ethnicity. The breast cancer population attributable risk proportions (PARP) explained by these factors across racial/ethnic groups are unknown.

METHODS

We analyzed data collected from 3,786,802 mammography examinations (1,071,653 women) in the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium, associated with 21,253 invasive breast cancers during a median of 5.2 years follow-up. HRs for body mass index (BMI) and breast density, adjusted for age and registry were estimated using separate Cox regression models by race/ethnicity (White, Black, Hispanic, Asian) and menopausal status. HRs were combined with observed risk-factor proportions to calculate PARPs for shifting overweight/obese to normal BMI and shifting heterogeneously/extremely dense to scattered fibroglandular densities.

RESULTS

The prevalences and HRs for overweight/obesity and heterogeneously/extremely dense breasts varied across races/ethnicities and menopausal status. BMI PARPs were larger for postmenopausal versus premenopausal women (12.0%-28.3% vs. 1.0%-9.9%) and nearly double among postmenopausal Black women (28.3%) than other races/ethnicities (12.0%-15.4%). Breast density PARPs were larger for premenopausal versus postmenopausal women (23.9%-35.0% vs. 13.0%-16.7%) and lower among premenopausal Black women (23.9%) than other races/ethnicities (30.4%-35.0%). Postmenopausal density PARPs were similar across races/ethnicities (13.0%-16.7%).

CONCLUSIONS

Overweight/obesity and dense breasts account for large proportions of breast cancers in White, Black, Hispanic, and Asian women despite large differences in risk-factor distributions.

IMPACT

Risk prediction models should consider how race/ethnicity interacts with BMI and breast density. Efforts to reduce BMI could have a large impact on breast cancer risk reduction, particularly among postmenopausal Black women.

Adjuvant ovarian function suppression and tamoxifen in premenopausal breast cancer patients: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The benefit of adding ovarian function suppression (OFS) to tamoxifen in the adjuvant treatment of premenopausal women with breast cancer is uncertain. We conducted a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials that addressed this question.

METHODS

Systematic search of PubMed, the web of science, and the meeting library of ASCO, ESMO, and SABCS was conducted using the following keywords: tamoxifen, ovarian suppression, and breast cancer. Eligible studies were those recruiting patients with breast cancer randomized to receive adjuvant tamoxifen and OFS versus tamoxifen alone. Pooled hazard ratio [HR]) for disease-free (DFS) and overall survival (OS) with 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated using the fixed effect model.

RESULTS

We searched a total of 845 records, of which 5 clinical trials, including 7557 patients, were eligible for our analysis. Adding OFS to tamoxifen improved DFS with pooled HR: 0.88 (95% CI: 0.80-0.96, P= 0.004) and OS (pooled HR: 0.87 {95% CI: 0.77-0.98, P= 0.02}) compared to tamoxifen alone. The benefit of the addition of OFS to tamoxifen was mostly observed in patients younger than 40 years where the pooled HRs of DFS was 0.76 (95% CI: 0.63-0.91; P= 0.004), and in those who received adjuvant chemotherapy with pooled HRs of DFS 0.80 (95% CI: 0.65-0.99, P= 0.042). There was an increase in the incidence of all grade musculoskeletal symptoms and high-grade hot flushes with the addition of OFS with risk ratios of 1.12 (95% CI: 1.07-1.17, P< 0.001) and 2.14 (95% CI: 1.01-4.51, P= 0.047) respectively.

CONCLUSION

Our analysis indicates that the addition of OFS to tamoxifen improves DFS and OS. This strategy could be considered in patients in which tamoxifen alone is not deemed sufficient or in case of poor tolerance to OFS with aromatase inhibitors.

Risk Factors Associated with Endometrial Pathology in Premenopausal Breast Cancer Patients Treated with Tamoxifen

PURPOSE

To evaluate factors associated with endometrial pathology during tamoxifen use in premenopausal breast cancer (BC) patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We reviewed the medical records of premenopausal BC patients treated with tamoxifen who underwent endometrial biopsy with or without hysteroscopy. Clinical characteristics were compared between women with endometrial pathology (endometrial hyperplasia or cancer) and those with normal histology or endometrial polyps.

RESULTS

Among 284 endometrial biopsies, endometrial hyperplasia was diagnosed in 7 patients (2.5%), endometrial cancer was diagnosed in 5 patients (1.8%), normal histology was noted in 146 patients (51.4%), and endometrial polyp was present in 114 patients (40.1%). When comparing women with endometrial cancer (n=5) to women with normal histology, abnormal uterine bleeding was more common (p=0.007), and endometrial thickness was greater (p=0.007) in women with endometrial cancer. Chemotherapy for BC was also more common in patients with endometrial cancer (p=0.037). When comparing women with endometrial polyps and those with endometrial hyperplasia or cancer, the presence of abnormal uterine bleeding was more common in patients with endometrial hyperplasia or cancer (p<0.001); however, tamoxifen duration and endometrial thickness did not differ significantly between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

In premenopausal BC patients treated with tamoxifen, abnormal uterine bleeding, increased endometrial thickness, and chemotherapy for BC were associated with the occurrence of endometrial cancer. These findings may provide useful information for gynecologic surveillance and counseling during tamoxifen treatment in premenopausal BC patients.

Ovarian suppression for adjuvant treatment of hormone receptor-positive early breast cancer

BACKGROUND

Approximately 80% of breast cancers amongst premenopausal women are hormone receptor-positive. Adjuvant endocrine therapy is an integral component of care for hormone receptor-positive breast cancer and in premenopausal women includes oestrogen receptor blockade with tamoxifen, temporary suppression of ovarian oestrogen synthesis by luteinising hormone releasing hormone (LHRH) agonists, and permanent interruption of ovarian oestrogen synthesis with oophorectomy or radiotherapy. Recent international consensus statements recommend single-agent tamoxifen or aromatase inhibitors with ovarian function suppression (OFS) as the current standard adjuvant endocrine therapy for premenopausal women (often preceded by chemotherapy). This review examined the role of adding OFS to another treatment (i.e. chemotherapy, endocrine therapy, or both) or comparing OFS to no further adjuvant treatment.

OBJECTIVES

To assess effects of OFS for treatment of premenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive early breast cancer.

SEARCH METHODS

For this review update, we searched the Specialised Register of the Cochrane Breast Cancer Group, MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2019, Issue 8), the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), and ClinicalTrials.gov on 26 September 2019. We screened the reference lists of related articles, contacted trial authors, and applied no language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised trials assessing any method of OFS, that is, oophorectomy, radiation-induced ovarian ablation, or LHRH agonists, as adjuvant treatment for premenopausal women with early-stage breast cancer. We included studies that compared (1) OFS versus observation, (2) OFS + chemotherapy versus chemotherapy, (3) OFS + tamoxifen versus tamoxifen, and (4) OFS + chemotherapy + tamoxifen versus chemotherapy + tamoxifen.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias and certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach. Hazard ratios (HRs) were derived for time-to-event outcomes, and meta-analysis was performed using a fixed-effect model. The primary outcome measures were overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS). Toxicity, contralateral breast cancer, and second malignancy were represented as risk ratios (RRs), and quality of life data were extracted when provided.

MAIN RESULTS

This review update included 15 studies involving 11,538 premenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive early breast cancer; these studies were conducted from 1978 to 2014. Some of these treatments are not current standard of care, and early studies did not assess HER2 receptor status. Studies tested OFS versus observation (one study), OFS plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy (six studies), OFS plus tamoxifen versus tamoxifen (six studies), and OFS plus chemotherapy and tamoxifen versus chemotherapy and tamoxifen (two studies). Of those studies that reported the chemotherapy regimen, an estimated 72% of women received an anthracycline. The results described below relate to the overall comparison of OFS versus no OFS. High-certainty evidence shows that adding OFS to treatment resulted in a reduction in mortality (hazard ratio (HR) 0.86, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.78 to 0.94; 11 studies; 10,374 women; 1933 reported events). This treatment effect was seen when OFS was added to observation, to tamoxifen, or to chemotherapy and tamoxifen. The effect on mortality was not observed when OFS was added to chemotherapy without tamoxifen therapy (HR 0.95, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.09; 5 studies; 3087 women; median follow-up: range 7.7 to 12.1 years). The addition of OFS resulted in improved DFS (HR 0.83, 95% CI 0.77 to 0.90; 10 studies; 8899 women; 2757 reported events; high-certainty evidence). The DFS treatment effect persisted when OFS was added to observation, to tamoxifen, and to chemotherapy and tamoxifen. The effect on DFS was reduced when OFS was added to chemotherapy without tamoxifen therapy (HR 0.90, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.01; 5 studies; 2450 women). Heterogeneity was low to moderate across studies for DFS and OS (respectively). Evidence suggests that adding OFS slightly increases the incidence of hot flushes (grade 3/4 or any grade; risk ratio (RR) 1.60, 95% CI 1.41 to 1.82; 6 studies; 5581 women; low-certainty evidence, as this may have been under-reported in these studies). Two other studies that could not be included in the meta-analysis reported a higher number of hot flushes in the OFS group than in the no-OFS group. Seven studies involving 5354 women collected information related to mood; however this information was reported as grade 3 or 4 depression, anxiety, or neuropsychiatric symptoms, or symptoms were reported without the grade. Two studies reported an increase in depression, anxiety, and neuropsychiatric symptoms in the OFS group compared to the no-OFS group, and five studies indicated an increase in anxiety in both treatment groups (but no difference between groups) or no difference overall in symptoms over time or between treatment groups. A single study reported bone health as osteoporosis (defined as T score < -2.5); this limited evidence suggests that OFS increases the risk of osteoporosis compared to no-OFS at median follow-up of 5.6 years (RR 1.16, 95% CI 1.10 to 28.82; 2011 women; low-certainty evidence). Adding OFS to treatment likely reduces the risk of contralateral breast cancer (HR 0.75, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.97; 9 studies; 9138 women; moderate-certainty evidence). Quality of life was assessed in five studies; four studies used validated tools, and the fifth study provided no information on how data were collected. Two studies reported worse quality of life indicators (i.e. vaginal dryness, day and night sweats) for women receiving OFS compared to those in the no-OFS group. The other two studies indicated worsening of symptoms (e.g. vasomotor, gynaecological, vaginal dryness, decline in sexual interest, bone and joint pain, weight gain); however these side effects were reported in both OFS and no-OFS groups. The study that did not use a validated quality of life tool described no considerable differences between groups.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review found evidence that supports adding OFS for premenopausal women with early, hormone receptor-positive breast cancers. The benefit of OFS persisted when compared to observation, and when added to endocrine therapy (tamoxifen) or chemotherapy and endocrine therapy (tamoxifen). The decision to use OFS may depend on the overall risk assessment based on tumour and patient characteristics, and may follow consideration of all side effects that occur with the addition of OFS.

Evaluating the Survival Benefit Following Ovarian Function Suppression in Premenopausal Patients with Hormone Receptor Positive Early Breast Cancer

There are divergent opinions regarding the use of ovarian function suppression or ablation (hereafter, OFS) in hormone receptor positive early breast cancer patients. In order to clarify the survival benefit of OFS, a meta-analysis was performed. The result is that use of OFS was more effective than no OFS on DFS (the pooled relative risk (pRR) = 0.86; 95% CI: 0.75–0.96) and on OS (pRR = 0.79; 95% CI: 0.70–0.89). In subgroup analysis, we found that increased DFS was positively associated with patients who had received chemotherapy (pRR = 0.85; 95% CI: 0.74–0.96), who were lymph node negative (pRR = 0.74; 95% CI: 0.61–0.91) and were less than 40 years old (pRR = 0.71; 95% CI: 0.59–0.83). There was a significant difference in OS between the groups receiving chemotherapy (pRR = 0.73; 95% CI: 0.58–0.89) or for patients less than 40 years old (pRR = 0.52; 95% CI: 0.18–0.87). The use of OFS also produces statistical differences in the occurrence of the side-effects; severe hot flashes (pRR = 2.32; 95% CI: 1.36–3.97), and hypertension (pRR = 1.54; 95% CI: 1.12–2.12). In general, OFS should be considered as one treatment for hormone receptor positive premenopausal early breast cancer patients who have received chemotherapy and are less than 40 years old. We also should pay attention to the side-effects and weigh the advantages and disadvantages before deciding on using OFS.

Clinical Trial of Acolbifene in Premenopausal Women at High Risk for Breast Cancer

The purpose of this study was to assess the feasibility of using the selective estrogen receptor modulator (SERM) acolbifene as a breast cancer prevention agent in premenopausal women. To do so, we assessed change in proliferation in benign breast tissue sampled by random periareolar fine-needle aspiration (RPFNA) as a primary endpoint, along with changes in other risk biomarkers and objective and subjective side effects as secondary endpoints. Twenty-five women with cytologic hyperplasia ± atypia and ≥2% of breast epithelial cells staining positive for Ki-67, received 20 mg acolbifene daily for 6-8 months, and then had benign breast tissue and blood risk biomarkers reassessed. Ki-67 decreased from a median of 4.6% [interquartile range (IQR), 3.1%-8.5%] at baseline to 1.4% (IQR, 0.6%-3.5%) after acolbifene (P < 0.001; Wilcoxon signed-rank test), despite increases in bioavailable estradiol. There were also significant decreases in expression (RT-qPCR) of estrogen-inducible genes that code for pS2, ERα, and progesterone receptor (P ≤ 0.026). There was no significant change in serum IGF1, IGFBP3, IGF1:IGFBP3 ratio, or mammographic breast density. Subjective side effects were minimal with no significant increase in hot flashes, muscle cramps, arthralgias, or fatigue. Objective measures showed a clinically insignificant decrease in lumbar spine bone density (DEXA) and an increase in ovarian cysts but no change in endometrial thickness (sonography). In summary, acolbifene was associated with favorable changes in benign breast epithelial cell proliferation and estrogen-inducible gene expression but minimal side effects, suggesting a phase IIB placebo-controlled trial evaluating it further for breast cancer prevention.

Tamoxifen with ovarian function suppression versus tamoxifen alone as an adjuvant treatment for premenopausal breast cancer: a meta-analysis of published randomized controlled trials

Background

Ovarian function suppression (OFS) significantly downregulates the concentration of plasma estrogens. However, it is unclear whether it offers any survival benefits if combined with adjuvant tamoxifen treatment in premenopausal women. This meta-analysis was designed to assess data from previous studies involving adjuvant tamoxifen treatment plus OFS in premenopausal breast cancer.

Methods

Electronic literature databases (PubMed, Embase, the Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library) were searched for relevant randomized controlled trials published prior to February 1, 2015. Only randomized controlled trials that compared tamoxifen alone with tamoxifen plus OFS for premenopausal women with breast cancer were selected. The evaluated endpoints were disease-free survival and overall survival.

Results

Four randomized controlled trials comprising 6,279 patients (OFS combination, n=3,133; tamoxifen alone, n=3,146) were included in the meta-analysis. There was no significant improvement in disease-free survival or overall survival with addition of OFS in either the whole population or the hormone receptor-positive subgroup. The risk of distant recurrence was not reduced with the addition of OFS in the whole population. A subgroup analysis showed that addition of OFS significantly improved overall survival in patients who were administered chemotherapy.

Conclusion

Based on the available studies, concurrent administration of OFS and adjuvant tamoxifen treatment for premenopausal women with breast cancer has no effect on prolonging disease-free survival and overall survival, excluding patients who were administered chemotherapy. It should not be widely recommended, except perhaps for women who were hormone-receptor positive and who were also administered adjuvant chemotherapy.

Ovarian hyperstimulation in premenopausal women during adjuvant tamoxifen treatment for endocrine-dependent breast cancer: A report of two cases

Adjuvant endocrine therapy is an integral component of care for endocrine-dependent breast cancer. The aim of this type of therapy is to counteract the production and the action of estrogens. The ovary is the primary site of estrogen production in premenopausal women, whereas, in postmenopausal women, the main source of estrogens is adipose tissue. Therefore, ovarian function suppression is an effective adjuvant strategy in premenopausal estrogen-dependent breast cancer. Similarly, the inhibition of estrogen action at the receptor site by tamoxifen has proven to be effective. To date, international consensus statements recommend tamoxifen (20 mg/day) for five years as the standard adjuvant endocrine therapy for premenopausal women. It should be noted that tamoxifen is a potent inducer of ovarian function and consequent hyperestrogenism in premenopausal women. In the present study, we report two cases of ovarian cyst formation with very high estrogen levels and endometrial hyperplasia during the administration of tamoxifen alone as adjuvant treatment for estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer in premenopausal women. These cases suggest that in young premenopausal patients with estrogen-dependent breast cancer, ovarian suppression is an essential prerequisite for an adjuvant endocrine therapy with tamoxifen. In this context, luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone agonist treatment by suppressing effective ovarian function may lead to a hypoestrogenic status that may positively impact breast cancer prognosis and prevent the effects of tamoxifen at the gynecological level. It is important to reconsider the action of tamoxifen on ovarian function and include these specific effects of tamoxifen in the informed consent of premenopausal patients who are candidates for tamoxifen alone as adjuvant endocrine treatment.